Hina Mittal1, Mike T John1, Stella Sekulić2, Nicole Theis-Mahon3, Ksenija Rener-Sitar4. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA; Interdisciplinary Doctoral Programme in Biomedicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, EU, Slovenia. 3. Health Sciences Libraries, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 4. Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, EU, Slovenia; Department of Prosthodontics, University Dental Clinics, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, EU, Slovenia. Electronic address: ksenija.rener@mf.uni-lj.si.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used beside disease-oriented outcomes (eg, number of teeth, clinical attachment level) to better capture the impact of diseases or interventions. To assess PROs for dental patients (dPROs), dental PRO measures (dPROMs) are applied. The aim of this systematic review was to identify generic dPROMs for adult patients and the dPROs. METHODS: This systematic review searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO databases along with hand searching, through December 2017, to identify English-language, multi-item dPROMs that are oral health generic, that is, they are applicable to a broad range of adult patients. RESULTS: We identified 20 questionnaires that contained 36 unique dPROs. They were measured by 53 dPROMs. dPRO names (N = 36) suggested they could be grouped into four dPRO categories: (1) Oral Function (N = 11), Orofacial Pain (N = 7), Orofacial Appearance (N = 3), and Psychosocial Impact (N = 14), as well as an additional dPRO that represented perceived oral health in general. Only eight questionnaires had a specific recall or reference period. dPROM's score dimensionality was only investigated in 13 of the 20 questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: The identified 36 dPROs represent the major aspects of an adult dental patient's oral health experience; however, four major dPRO categories, that is, Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact, summarize how patients are impacted. If multi-item, oral health-generic dPROMs are to be used to measure patients' suffering, the 53 dPROMs represent current available tools. Limitations of the majority of these dPROMs include incomplete knowledge about their dimensionality, which affects their validity, and an unspecified recall period, which reduces their clinical applicability.
OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used beside disease-oriented outcomes (eg, number of teeth, clinical attachment level) to better capture the impact of diseases or interventions. To assess PROs for dental patients (dPROs), dental PRO measures (dPROMs) are applied. The aim of this systematic review was to identify generic dPROMs for adult patients and the dPROs. METHODS: This systematic review searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO databases along with hand searching, through December 2017, to identify English-language, multi-item dPROMs that are oral health generic, that is, they are applicable to a broad range of adult patients. RESULTS: We identified 20 questionnaires that contained 36 unique dPROs. They were measured by 53 dPROMs. dPRO names (N = 36) suggested they could be grouped into four dPRO categories: (1) Oral Function (N = 11), Orofacial Pain (N = 7), Orofacial Appearance (N = 3), and Psychosocial Impact (N = 14), as well as an additional dPRO that represented perceived oral health in general. Only eight questionnaires had a specific recall or reference period. dPROM's score dimensionality was only investigated in 13 of the 20 questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: The identified 36 dPROs represent the major aspects of an adult dental patient's oral health experience; however, four major dPRO categories, that is, Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact, summarize how patients are impacted. If multi-item, oral health-generic dPROMs are to be used to measure patients' suffering, the 53 dPROMs represent current available tools. Limitations of the majority of these dPROMs include incomplete knowledge about their dimensionality, which affects their validity, and an unspecified recall period, which reduces their clinical applicability.
Authors: Jeff A Sloan; Neil Aaronson; Joseph C Cappelleri; Diane L Fairclough; Claudette Varricchio Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; Ron D Hays; Jakob B Bjorner; Karon F Cook; Paul K Crane; Jeanne A Teresi; David Thissen; Dennis A Revicki; David J Weiss; Ronald K Hambleton; Honghu Liu; Richard Gershon; Steven P Reise; Jin-shei Lai; David Cella Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Vishal R Aggarwal; Mark Lunt; Joanna M Zakrzewska; Gary J Macfarlane; Tatiana V Macfarlane Journal: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 3.383
Authors: M T John; M Omara; N Su; T List; S Sekulic; B Häggman-Henrikson; C M Visscher; K Bekes; D R Reissmann; K Baba; O Schierz; N Theis-Mahon; K Fueki; T Stamm; L Bondemark; I Oghli; A van Wijk; P Larsson Journal: J Evid Based Dent Pract Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 5.267
Authors: Mike T John; Stella Sekulić; Katrin Bekes; Mohammad H Al-Harthy; Ambra Michelotti; Daniel R Reissmann; Julijana Nikolovska; Sahityaveera Sanivarapu; Folake B Lawal; Thomas List; Sanja Peršić Kiršić; Ljiljana Strajnić; Rodrigo Casassus; Kazuyoshi Baba; Martin Schimmel; Ama Amuasi; Ruwan D Jayasinghe; Sanela Strujić-Porović; Christopher C Peck; Han Xie; Karina Haugaard Bendixen; Miguel Angel Simancas Pallares; Eka Perez-Franco; Mohammad Mehdi Naghibi Sistani; Patricia Valerio; Natalia Letunova; Nazik M Nurelhuda; David W Bartlett; Ikeoluwa A Oluwafemi; Saloua Dghoughi; Joao N A R Ferreira; Pathamas Chantaracherd; Ksenija Rener-Sitar Journal: J Evid Based Dent Pract Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 5.267
Authors: Katrin Bekes; Mike T John; Ksenija Rener-Sitar; Mohammad H Al-Harthy; Ambra Michelotti; Daniel R Reissmann; Julijana Nikolovska; Sahityaveera Sanivarapu; Folake B Lawal; Thomas List; Sanja Peršić Kiršić; Ljiljana Strajnić; Rodrigo Casassus; Kazuyoshi Baba; Martin Schimmel; Ama Amuasi; Ruwan D Jayasinghe; Sanela Strujić-Porović; Christopher C Peck; Han Xie; Karina Haugaard Bendixen; Miguel Angel Simancas-Pallares; Eka Perez-Franco; Mohammad Mehdi Naghibi Sistani; Patricia Valerio; Natalia Letunova; Nazik Nurelhuda; David W Bartlett; Ikeoluwa A Oluwafemi; Saloua Dghoughi; Joao N A R Ferreira; Pathamas Chantaracherd; Stella Sekulić Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2021-06-13 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Danna R Paulson; Swaha Pattanaik; Phonsuda Chanthavisouk; Mike T John Journal: Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz Date: 2021-07-09 Impact factor: 1.595